IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
BATED THIS THE 4TH DAY 09 OCTOBER. 2910
BEFORE A M
THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE B.sREENIvAsfE"'GéW BfA _
Miscellaneous First Appeal Nq,....1064'E"df 'V .
Between
1. Smt. Durgamma,
W/0. Mahadevappa.
Age: 51 Years, Nil. _ A 1.
2.. Smt. Devamrna," .
W/0. Durgappa': _ .
Age: 253 Yéaars, Dec; 'Nil " _
B0t};1"'a1ie R€:5jding.__at._ " 'V .
Rangapiefge, R;e:_thfié1';ia PGst,'g
~SU1'flp1;1I'a'V;T59$ui§, '
Gulbaiiga ,Dist1*i¢t: . _ *
Appellants
" {By Latur. Adv.)
~. __1V'§;'1:iaging Director,
Bivision,
H'Roac1,
" .vS§1anthinagar,
Bangalore - 27.
The Divisional Manager,
United india Insurance Co. Ltd,
No. 19-19/1. South End Road,
2"'? F1001'. Basavanagudi,
fir
E\.)
Bangalore - 04.
Respondents
{By Sri. K N Srinivas, Adv. for R2,
R1 ~ notice dispensed with v/o. dated
This MFA is filed U/S 173(1) of MV._A,c:ti..agai11st the
judgment and award dated: .27,’-{)5/iZO08″t–pas’sed ‘in ‘
MVC No.1967’/2007 on the ;fi1e_pi;iI’x_ ‘Addl;-sludge’,
Member Mact-7 Court of SrnalI?._Causes; ..Bang”a.lovre
partly allowing the claim petition ” for’ corn.p’en.satioI”f. andfl
seeking enhancement of compensation.’ ‘
This appeal corning_.o’n::for”‘Adrnissien_,.~lthis day,
the Court, delivered fo;i_1o\:;ing–:._’»..i
Thig. fthe lwclaimants, seeking
enhanc’einle’f:i1t :€’:f– “‘co1″nplei*’1satilon awarded by the
Tribnnal.._ i
it Heard”; ~ appeal is admitted and with the
.’ –of’–l.earned Counsel appearing for the parties it
E ‘- final disposal.
A 3. ll v._For the sake of convenience parties are referred to
aslithey are referred in the claim petition.
4. Brief facts of the case are:
‘That on 28.01.2007 when deceased Durgappa
was proceeding on bicycle from Murugeshapalya
towards Nagavara Palya near Geethanjali a
BMTC bus bearing registration No. KA
from behind in a rash andyn’eglige5nt _fnat4iner_jg.a1?1.dl’
dashed him, as a result, he sustaineld grieyous,
and died on the spot. Hencelyhtis and filed a’
claim petition before seeking
compensation of Tribunal has
awarded cc~1r:};§ensation — with interest
at 6%
5. regarding death of deceased
Durgaplpallin negligence and liability of the
I_11l3urc1* of .lt’lie….Qff.¢nding vehicle the only point that
‘ lrcmainsifor’consideration is:
A j_ l.’?Whether the compensation awarded by
the.-Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it
~. call for enhancement?
it After hearing the learned Counsel appearing for
the parties and perusing the judgment and award of the
Tribunal I am of the Vi€W that the compensation
EV
awarded by the Tribunal is not just and reasonable, it
is on the lower side and therefore it is deservedto be
enhanced. * V h
7. Deceased Durgappa was aged about;25«iyeal5s_1’at
the time of his death in the accidentas from,’
post mortem report Ex. P 6.1_c1a.afi;afir.s”w1ao»az:_é
mother and wife of the-.___ deceased iull’
their contention that earning
Rs.6,000/– pm. by’ exarnining first
claimant as 1 any document
regarding _i l onsidering year of
accident,’ and his profession as
coolie ltiile deceased assessed by the
at.’ ‘R~s,3_,_Q00/– p.rn. and deduction of 1/31″
‘ Utowardslhis”p_ersona1 expenses is just and proper. But
o5’ful18 is applicable as against 17 applied by
the ribnlnal. Accordingly loss of dependency Works
to Rs.4.32.0o0/~ {Rs.3,000/– x 2/3 x 12 x 18) and
digit is awarded as against Rs.4,08,000/~« awarded by the
Tribunal.
8. The Tribunal has rightly awarded Rs.60,000/–
towards conventional heads such loss of consortium,
loss of love and affection, loss of estate, transp.ortat;ion
of dead body and funeral expenses *11o
scope for enhancernent under con.Veentic~na’1″he-ads.V”.V
9. Accordingly the appeal
judgment and award of thleV:V”‘Fr_ibun’al_’ to there’
extend stated hereinahoveV,t.——–‘i’bhe ‘c1gun}ia’m.s.. entitled
for a total — as against
Rs.4,68,000./.-~laivardeldyhe ‘with interest at
Q% p.a. of Rs.24,000/\
[Ru1:lVees–.T’Aur.edrli only) from the date of
claim Iaetition realisation.
uIns:1jI*an_c_e,Con1pany is directed to deposit the
‘,.e11hanced~_’compensation with interest within two
the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgrnent:. Out of the same Rs.l5,()OO/– with
.}V3i3o_1_3ortionate interest is ordered to be invested in the
Vlériame of the second claimant who is the wife of the
deceased for a period of seven years and the remaining
fir
6
amount is ordered to be released in favour of the
claimants in equal proportion.
N0 order as to cost.
Sri KN. Srinivas, Advocate is permitted’.
vakalath for R 2.
sal-. :ff
Vb/–